this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2023
36 points (100.0% liked)
unix like operating system lovers
2152 readers
1 users here now
This is a community that is only for nerds jk. everyone who doesn't scare when seeing UNIX terminal welcome! rules:
- don't make comments that branch out from the main topic too much, at least please somehow relate to it.
- retro operating systems, e.g. discussion about them, is strictly forbidden, please make a retro community instead.
- please be nice for others.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What features does it has what other package manager doesn't have
No one's fielded this yet, so I'll give it a shot.
Portage offers maximum configurability: you can switch optional package features on and off. If a package feature is off, you don't need to install dependencies to support it, so it makes for a slimmer system.
You can upgrade many packages even if the distribution hasn't by copying a single small file to a new name and running two commands.
Similarly, if you're running a new or fringe architecture (like riscv) and want to try to install a package that isn't officially available for it, you can do it fairly simply (minor edit to a text file or additional parameter at the command line). Doesn't always work, but it's still easier than the configure-make-make_install dance, and the dependencies are handled for you.
Portage also supports a bunch of other fringe use cases, like pulling source straight from git and building it. And you can create simple packages by writing <10 lines of text file (well, specialized bash shell script).
On the downside, Portage is S-L-O-W. It has more complicated dependency trees to resolve than other package managers, and installs most packages by building them from source (although this isn't a requirement).
I like it, though.